Telling naïve students to keep their guns utterly hidden is a favorite tact of bad concealed carry instructors. Some good and well-meaning instructors say that “printing” can get you in trouble in some places. To some extent, the latter is true. Sloppy concealment and/or accidental exposure can lead to headaches in a couple states. Worries about the shape of guns being seen through clothing has long been a fear and rumor of new carriers alike. “Concealed means concealed” is a good maxim for several reasons, but a myth about something that isn’t illegal isn’t one. “Printing” refers to what the act of the gun physically imprinting its outline on the clothing is colloquially called (example). For example, a “printing” law would make handgun imprinting illegal. “Printing” is like hiding behind a curtain and anyone being able to tell the shape in the curtain was a person. “Printing” is not the concern that many make it out to be, but proper concealment is important (read more). Nowhere in the United States (not counting territories) does a statute exist that makes it illegal for one's concealed handgun to imprint its shape on the carrier's clothing. Accidental exposure is not criminal either, however, in some locations it can be hazardous depending on the attitude of the police and public. “Printing” of your handgun is not illegal. Many states have laws requiring that the gun be totally covered and that partial exposure is not permitted. Accidental exposure is not the aim of this article, though it is addressed. Unintentional exposure by body movement, etc. when care was taken to conceal the handgun properly is also not strictly illegal, although some laws leave enough leeway to be problematic. Florida is one such example and the only state with legitimate, widespread issues involving partially concealed weapons leading to law enforcement trouble. The exact definition of “concealed” varies from state to state and many states have no definition at all. Words, if not specifically defined, are interpreted according to their plain, ordinary meaning (concealed in this case). Merriam-Webster defines concealed as: “kept out of sight or hidden from view.” Using the curtain example, the person is concealed as they cannot be directly seen, but from other inferences like size and shape, one can safely assume the shape is a person (or a gun). Definitions and laws vary wildly based on the actual statute and case law. Some statutes and case law implies that a handgun must be totally undetectable through clothing, but this is a very broad interpretation that is not backed up by case law or actual examples of constituting a “printing” failure to conceal violation. The definition of “concealed” serves the main purpose of defining for courts what concealed means in the context of carrying a concealed weapon illegally. Some states consider partially concealed guns illegal concealment, while others take the position that if part of the gun can be identified as a gun, it is openly carried. These definitions don’t necessarily impose a duty on legal concealed carriers to keep totally concealed and charge accidental exposure as a crime. “No case law” means that there is no case law specifically applicable to “printing” or defining concealed in a context of imprinting. Some cases may be directly unrelated to “printing”, but are included for reference. This examination does not include every statute that can be broadly interpreted, such as drawing, aiming, or exhibiting a firearm (brandishing) or vague “causing alarm” laws without case law or examples of arrests. The scope is limited to intentional or negligent failure to conceal or specific laws requiring a firearm to be visually undetectable under clothing. Some reference examples of indirectly related statutes are included for reference. State by StateAlabama No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Alaska No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Arizona No printing laws, no case law found. Constitutional carry state. ARS 13-3102 b. “A concealed deadly weapon is not carried in: (a) A manner where any portion of the firearm or holster in which the firearm is carried is visible. (b) A holster that is wholly or partially visible.” Arkansas No printing laws, no case law found. AR Code § 5-73-301(2) “‘Concealed’ means to cover from observation so as to prevent public view.” California No printing laws. People v. Hodges (1999) defines “concealed.” “Statutory terms are to be understood in their ordinary and usual meanings unless the context indicates otherwise. To conceal is [...] ‘1: to prevent disclosure or recognition of: avoid revelation of: refrain from revealing: withhold knowledge of: draw attention from: treat so as to be unnoticed... 2: to place out of sight: withdraw from being observed: shield from vision or notice...’[Webster's]” People v. Fuentes (1976) and People v. Wharton (1992) requires “substantial concealment,” both of which found that a partially exposed dirk or dagger (analogous to a tucked pistol) was concealed and not openly carried. “The mere fact that some portion of the handle may have been visible makes it no less a concealed weapon,” (Fuentes).” The statewide standard application states, but is not backed by a specific statute that: a permittee “unjustifiably display a concealed weapon.” This is like a reference to brandishing, 417 PC. 26200 PC allows the issuing sheriff or police chief to place “reasonable restrictions” on many conditions, including the “manner” of carry. I have been unable to find any cases where imprinting has led to trouble in California (at least for permittees). Colorado No printing laws. In people People v. Vincent (1981), it was found that the jury had to determine what was considered concealed. A reserve police officer saw the defendant with a derringer handle protruding from his pants. Later, it was found that: “‘Concealed' means placed out of sight so as not to be discernible or apparent by ordinary observation,” (People ex rel. O.R, 2008). This was a juvenile case where the defendant had a handgun partially protruding from a pocket, the appeals court found the firearm was not concealed. “Applying the plain and ordinary meaning of the statutory language here, we conclude that 'concealed' for purposes of section 18-12-105(1)(b) means placed out of sight so as not to be discernible or apparent by ordinary observation. To hold that a firearm that is discernible or apparent by ordinary observation is 'concealed' would lead to absurd results. For example, defining ‘concealed’ so broadly as to subsume a partially concealed but readily observable and identifiable weapon would render it unlawful to carry a holstered handgun—no matter how brazenly displayed—if any part of the gun was concealed by the holster.” Connecticut No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Sec. 29-32 allows revocation of firearm permit for “cause.” Cause is not defined and all references state or infer that, aside from certain mandatory convictions, it is subjective. However, references are clear that open carry is legal. Delaware No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. 11.5.602(b) “A person is guilty of aggravated menacing when by displaying what appears to be a deadly weapon that person intentionally places another person in fear of imminent physical injury.” District of Columbia No printing laws, no case law found. 2344.1 “A licensee shall carry any pistol in a manner that it is entirely hidden from view of the public when carried on or about a person, or when in a vehicle in such a way as it is entirely hidden from view of the public.” Theoretically, failure to properly conceal (intentionally) could be grounds for a carrying firearm charge. Florida There are no printing laws in Florida, but unintentional exposure (lifting up arms, exposing gun) is a potential risk, though not actually illegal. There is an issue with overzealous law enforcement and prosecution using ambiguities in law to charge unintentional exposure of a handgun as an open carry violation. Florida Carry discusses this problem. Though the problem is unusual and exceptional, it has occurred and Florida police have known issues with overreacting to lawful open carry (see 790.053). To resolve the accidental exposure problem, HB 39 was proposed in 2018, but failed to be come law, to expressly specify accidental exposure was not an open carry violation. 790.001(2) “‘Concealed firearm’ means any firearm, as defined in subsection (6), which is carried on or about a person in such a manner as to conceal the firearm from the ordinary sight of another person.” 790.053 Open carrying of weapons is illegal in Florida (except for hunting, fishing, and camping). “(1) Except as otherwise provided by law and in subsection (2), it is unlawful for any person to openly carry on or about his or her person any firearm or electric weapon or device. It is not a violation of this section for a person licensed to carry a concealed firearm as provided in 790.06(1), and who is lawfully carrying a firearm in a concealed manner, to briefly and openly display the firearm to the ordinary sight of another person, unless the firearm is intentionally displayed in an angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense.” [emphasis added] It is only illegally to intentionally openly carry or to brandish the firearm. Brief and unintentional exposure of a concealed firearm is not illegal. Regalado v. State found that imprinting was not illegal open carry and even though the officer recognized the bulge as a gun. “The officer observed a bulge in Regalado's waistband, which in his experience looked like a gun. [...] The gun in question was tucked in Regalado's waistband and covered by his shirt. Openly carrying a weapon is the opposite of carrying a concealed weapon, which is defined as to be ‘in such a manner as to conceal the weapon from the ordinary sight of another person.’” Ensor v. State requires that an ordinary person, not just a police officer who has training and experience to look for a firearm, can recognize the gun as such. “For a firearm to be concealed, it must be [...] hidden from the ordinary sight of another person. [...] The term 'ordinary sight of another person' means the casual and ordinary observation of another in the normal associations of life.” Not just a trained and experienced police officer. “The critical question turns on whether an individual, standing near a person with a firearm or beside a vehicle in which a person with a firearm is seated, may by ordinary observation know the questioned object to be a firearm. The ultimate decision must rest upon the trier of fact under the circumstances of each case.” Georgia No printing laws. A partially exposed handgun (tucked) is concealed. Gainer v. State specifically found that a bulge in the shape of a pistol is concealed, as it was not “fully exposed” to view, even if the officer could tell the bulge was a pistol. However, one cannot be detained solely to determine if one has a permit. “Fully exposed” means that part of the pistol is not concealed. “This law's purpose is to compel persons carrying such weapons to display them so that others, knowing they were armed and dangerous, could avoid them,” (Parrish v. State). Early landmark open carry case Nunn v. State held that a pistol tucked in the waistband where the butt (and more, in Nunn's case) were visible, did not constitute a concealed weapon. This was reversed by a racist decision supporting pistol licenses, Strickland v. State (1911). Despite licensing requirements, a partially visible or “tucked” handgun was considered not concealed until Anderson v. State. Anderson definitively concluded a pistol carried on the person, but partially concealed, was illegally concealed weapon; a precedent that upheld most recently in Summerlin v. State (2009). Summerlin held that a weapon “shall only be carried in an open and fully exposed manner” to avoid a concealed weapon charge. Hawaii No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Idaho No printing laws, no case law found. 18-3302(2)(a) “‘Concealed weapon’ means any deadly weapon carried on or about the person in a manner not discernible by ordinary observation.” Illinois No printing laws, no case law found. The statutes are ambiguous, but it appears that partial, unintentional exposure of a handgun or holster would not be illegal, according to various informed state resources speculating on legislative intent. As far as a deliberate tucked firearm or partially visible holster, the Illinois State Police issued guidance in 2013 that stated: "'Concealed' means partially or mostly concealed from view of the public on or about a person within a vehicle. While the FCCA does not permit open carry, use of the terms 'mostly' and 'partially concealed' suggest that something less than fully concealed or out of plain view is required." 430 ILCS 66/10(c)(1) “[license required to] carry a loaded or unloaded concealed firearm, fully concealed or partially concealed, on or about his or her person; and…” Open carry is illegal in Illinois. Possession of a handgun is illegal, without a concealed firearm permit, and carrying according to terms of the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, which defines the weapon as “completely or mostly concealed from view,” (430 ILCS 66/1). Indiana No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Iowa No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Kansas No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. However, from the official Attorney General concealed carry instructor guidelines, it is advised that printing is a bad practice (according to them), but not illegal. “X. GENERAL RULES. A. When carrying concealed, do not "advertise" that you are doing so. Carrying a concealed firearm is not a game - it is a means of self-defense that carries grave responsibility. There are many people who detest or fear handguns. Keep your firearm out of sight, attempt at all costs to avoid “printing,’ and respectfully decline requests to show it to others in any public setting. The wisdom of this rule is highlighted by the law in states like Florida and Texas (not Kansas) and some foreign countries to the effect that displaying a lawfully concealed handgun is a criminal offense.” (p. 64) Kentucky No printing laws. Prince v. Com. A “weapon is generally held to be concealed when so placed that it cannot be readily seen under ordinary observation.” Louisiana No printing laws. State v. Fluker “In order to be 'concealed' within the meaning of the law, an object must be fully hidden from view.” […] “The appropriate test to be applied in prosecutions for illegal carrying of weapons is whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case as disclosed by the evidence, the manner in which defendant carried the weapon evinced an intent to conceal its identity.” […] “The problem is whether there has been an intentional concealment. If a part of the weapon is openly displayed, such open display is hardly consistent with an intent to conceal. If a part is subject to view, not through an intention for it to be openly displayed but merely by virtue of sloppy concealment, then it seems there may be intentional concealment even though there is not full concealment.” Maine No printing laws, no case law found. MRS 25-252-2001-A B. Definition of concealed from threatening display of the same: "Wear under the person's clothes or conceal about the person's person a firearm." Maryland No printing laws, no case law found. Open and concealed carry are illegal without a permit. Maryland Code, Criminal Law § 4-206 (a)(1) “A law enforcement officer may make an inquiry and conduct a limited search of a person under paragraph (2) of this subsection if the officer, in light of the officer's observations, information, and experience, reasonably believes that: (i) the person may be wearing, carrying, or transporting a handgun in violation of § 4-203 of this subtitle […].” Massachusetts No printing laws. “May issue” state and permit issuance and revocation is subject to issuing authority’s discretion. “The licensing authority may deny the application or renewal of a license to carry, or suspend or revoke a license issued under this section if, in a reasonable exercise of discretion, the licensing authority determines that the applicant or licensee is unsuitable to be issued or to continue to hold a license to carry. A determination of unsuitability shall be based on: (i) reliable and credible information that the applicant or licensee has exhibited or engaged in behavior that suggests that, if issued a license, the applicant or licensee may create a risk to public safety; or (ii) existing factors that suggest that, if issued a license, the applicant or licensee may create a risk to public safety.” (Title XX-140-131) Firearms Records Bureau v. Simkin: “We suspect that the average Massachusetts resident may become 'alarmed' on learning that someone other than a law enforcement officer is carrying concealed weapons in his or her presence. However, Simkin is not responsible for alarm caused to others by his mere carrying of concealed weapons pursuant to a license permitting him to do exactly that.” An attorney was detained, though ultimately not arrested, when his jacket blew open exposing his pistol, which was seen by a police officer (source). Michigan No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Minnesota No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Mississippi No printing laws, no case law found. MS Code 97-37-1 “(1) Except as otherwise provided in Section 45-9-101, any person who carries, concealed on or about one's person, [...] (4) For the purposes of this section, ‘concealed’ means hidden or obscured from common observation and shall not include any weapon listed in subsection (1) of this section, including, but not limited to, a loaded or unloaded pistol carried upon the person in a sheath, belt holster or shoulder holster that is wholly or partially visible, or carried upon the person in a scabbard or case for carrying the weapon that is wholly or partially visible.” MS Code 45-9-101(24) “A license under this section is not required for a loaded or unloaded pistol or revolver to be carried upon the person in a sheath, belt holster or shoulder holster or in a purse, handbag, satchel, other similar bag or briefcase or fully enclosed case if the person is not engaged in criminal activity other than a misdemeanor traffic offense, is not otherwise prohibited from possessing a pistol or revolver under state or federal law, and is not in a location prohibited under subsection (13) of this section.” Missouri No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Open carry is legal in Missouri, but some municipalities may ban open carry. House Bill 1647 (2012) removed the penalties for inadvertent exposure of a concealed firearm by a concealed carry. This was a compromise on open carry and intended to address concerns that inadvertent exposure in municipalities with open carry bans could result in arrest for innocently exposing a gun. Mike Stollenwerk of OpenCarry.org explains his take: "No, the new statutory provision allowing brief open carry is essentially a **preemption statute** - there is no state law against open carry or printing in Missouri - so what it means is that (1) Defendants accused of violating local open carry bans can claim a safe harbor (temporary OC) and probably (2) the statute probably means that any prosecutor must now prove as an element of the local open carry offense that the open carry was not a temporary open carry; and probably that a prosecutorial failure to claim that the open carry was NOT temporary would provide the Defendant the ability to succeed on a Motion to Dismiss the Case without even MOUNTING a Defense." The relevant statute: 571.037. “Open display of firearm permitted, when. — Any person who has a valid concealed carry endorsement issued prior to August 28, 2013, or a valid concealed carry permit, and who is lawfully carrying a firearm in a concealed manner, may briefly and openly display the firearm to the ordinary sight of another person, unless the firearm is intentionally displayed in an angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self defense.” Montana No printing laws, no case law found. 45-8-315 “‘Concealed weapon’ means any weapon [...] that is wholly or partially covered by the clothing or wearing apparel of the person carrying or bearing the weapon [...].” Nebraska No printing laws, no case law found. 69-2429(1) “Concealed handgun means the handgun is totally hidden from view. If any part of the handgun is capable of being seen, it is not a concealed handgun.” Nevada NRS 202.3653 “‘Concealed firearm’ is a loaded or unloaded handgun which is carried upon a person in such a manner as not to be discernible by ordinary observation.” New Hampshire No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. New Jersey No definition of “concealed,” but open carry is essentially illegal. No specific statute or regulation on printing found, but due to the state’s treatment of the Second Amendment, subjective criteria could be theoretically used to revoke a permit for someone who was observed printing. New Mexico 29-19-2D “‘Concealed handgun’ means a loaded handgun that is not visible to the ordinary observations of a reasonable person.” New York New York is a default “no carry” state, where only concealed carry by permit is allowed (NY Penal Law 400(2). Specifically, the law states one may “have and carry concealed.” Open carry is illegal, however, there is no definition of “concealed.” No relevant case law was found nor any laws or other regulations governing printing and among the local gun forums, it appears printing outside of New York City is not an concern. Permits are discretionary and may be revoked if one is especially careless. Though no examples were found, under the right circumstances, potentially “menacing” or brandishing could apply, though this is not likely through innocently imprinting through clothes. Menacing Penal Law 120.14 "A person is guilty of menacing in the second degree when: 1. He or she intentionally places or attempts to place another person in reasonable fear of physical injury, serious physical injury or death by displaying a deadly weapon, dangerous instrument or what appears to be a pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun, machine gun or other firearm.” [emphasis added] North Carolina No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. North Dakota No printing laws, no case law found. 62.1-04-01. Definition of concealed. “A firearm or dangerous weapon is concealed if it is carried in such a manner as to not be discernible by the ordinary observation of a passerby. There is no requirement that there be absolute invisibility of the firearm or dangerous weapon, merely that it not be ordinarily discernible. A firearm or dangerous weapon is considered concealed if it is not secured, and is worn under clothing or carried in a bundle that is held or carried by the individual, or transported in a vehicle under the individual's control or direction and available to the individual, including beneath the seat or in a glove compartment.” Emphasis added. See definition of “secured.” Ohio No printing laws, no case law found. Concealed is the opposite of “plain sight.” The Ohio Attorney General’s CCW Manual has this to say about “plain sight”: “So far, the Ohio Supreme Court has not defined the term ‘plain sight’ precisely in the context of carrying a concealed handgun. However, in other contexts, courts have generally said that the term ‘plain sight’ is a common-sense term that means clearly visible or unobstructed.” Thus, a concealed handgun would not be clearly visible and obstructed. Oklahoma No printing laws, no case law found. 21 O.S 1290.2 A
Prior to changes in 2013, it was illegal to “intentionally display the pistol” not otherwise authorized by law (ex. self-defense), and for non-Oklahomans carrying on an out-of-state permit, it was required that “the firearm must be carried fully concealed from detection and view.” These sections no longer apply as written as open carry is now legal. Reckless conduct with a firearm, as per the jury instructions, requires that one created a situation of unreasonable risk and probability of death or great bodily harm to another; none of which a poorly concealed handgun does. Oregon No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Pennsylvania No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law relevant to printing. Case law in Pennsylvania is murky, with the current legal ground being that partial concealment (a tucked gun, butt visible) meets the definition of concealed. Previous cases have decided it on a case-by-case basis. One lawyer’s take is that this approach avoid any ambiguity over if an imprinting firearm is concealed or not. Rhode Island No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law relevant to printing. 11-47-11 gives authority to carry a concealed handgun by license, but there is no provision for accidental exposure/poor concealment. 11-47-13 allows revocation of a license with just cause, which is not defined. Additionally, for information, 11-47-47 Display of weapons refers to handguns on display in a shop window. South Carolina Open carry is illegal. 16-23-20 “It is unlawful for anyone to carry about the person any handgun, whether concealed or not, except as follows, unless otherwise specifically prohibited by law.” Subsection (12) requires that to be exempt from an unlawful carrying of handgun charge, one must carry according to the terms of the permit. The permit terms require concealment. 23-31-210(5) “‘Concealable weapon’ means a firearm having a length of less than twelve inches measured along its greatest dimension that must be carried in a manner that is hidden from public view in normal wear of clothing except when needed for self-defense, defense of others, and the protection of real or personal property.” However, “a manner that is hidden from public view in normal wear of clothing” is not defined. No case law could be found and anecdotal information indicates that only concealed carry, not imprinting or accidental exposure, is illegal. Unlawful carry of a handgun is a misdemeanor (16-23-50). South Dakota 22-1-2(6) “‘Concealed,’ any firearm that is totally hidden from view. If any part of the firearm is capable of being seen, it is not concealed.” Tennessee No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. An Attorney General opinion states that: “If the legislature had intended to require a permit holder to carry his or her handgun concealed, it would have done so by prohibiting the open carrying of a handgun and expressly requiring the concealed carry of a handgun.” Texas Penal Code section 46.035 prohibits “a partially or wholly visible handgun” on college campuses; this mandates concealed carry only on campus. Printing is not Illegal. Licensed open carry is now permitted in Texas. Imprinting has never been illegal in Texas, but “intentional failure to conceal” was formerly prohibited, leading to the mistaken impression that imprinting and accidental exposure in Texas (and elsewhere) was illegal. The imprint showing through was never illegal. The misunderstanding about this law seems to have driven most of the “printing” rumors. Penal Code section 46.035(a) formerly stated that licensees committed a crime when they “intentionally fails to conceal the handgun in plain view of another person in a public place.” In my research, no lawful concealed carrier was ever successfully prosecuted for unintentionally allowing a gun to become visible. In 2013, SB 299 was passed to clarify that this prohibition was to cover intentional acts of exposure. SB 299 changed the language to “intentionally displays the handgun in plain view of another person in a public place.” Read more details in this excerpt from my open carry book draft. Utah No printing laws, no case law found. “‘Concealed firearm’ means a firearm that is: covered, hidden, or secreted in a manner that the public would not be aware of its presence,” 76-10-501(3)(i). Vermont No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. Vermont never regulated the carrying of firearms, openly or concealed, for self-defense. Virginia No printing laws, no case law found. Defines “concealed” as “hidden from common observation,” (18.2-308). This does not prohibit openly carried firearms, resulting in the so-called ‘Virginia tuck’ method where concealed carriers tuck their outer garments in a way so as to expose the butt of their firearm, making it openly carried. It was formerly illegal to carry a concealed handgun onto the premises of any restaurant or club which was licensed to serve alcohol (superseded 18.2-308 J3). In 2010, the "restaurant ban repeal" (Senate Bill 334/House Bill 505) was passed and signed by Gov. McDonnell. Prior to this, armed patrons were required to openly carry, thus resulting in the tucking of shirts to expose the pistol's grip, creating the expression "Virginia tuck" for this method of carry. Today, it is illegal to consume alcohol while carrying concealed or to become intoxicated while armed (18.2-308.012). Washington No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. West Virginia Constitutional carry state. No printing laws, no case law found. 61-7-2 (10) “‘Concealed’ means hidden from ordinary observation so as to prevent disclosure or recognition. A deadly weapon is concealed when it is carried on or about the person in such a manner that another person in the ordinary course of events would not be placed on notice that the deadly weapon was being carried.” 61-7-11 “It shall be unlawful for any person armed with a firearm or other deadly weapon, whether licensed to carry the same or not, to carry, brandish or use such weapon in a way or manner to cause, or threaten, a breach of the peace.” Wisconsin No printing laws. Mularkey v. State: “If the weapon is hidden from ordinary observation, it is concealed. Absolute invisibility to other persons is not indispensable to concealment.” This Attorney General opinion on open carry has some tangentially related information that is relative to imprinting. From a DOJ FAQ: "Unless the facts and circumstances indicate a malicious or criminal intent, a person may not be charged with an ordinance or criminal offense of disorderly conduct for going armed with a concealed or openly carried firearm." Wyoming No definition of “concealed,” no printing laws, no case law found. States fall into a couple of clear classifiers when defining concealed. Note the exact construction, implying strictness of the requirement, can vary. For example, Louisiana requires a concealed weapon be fully hidden from view to be an illegally concealed weapon, but the Bayou State is an open carry state, while DC has banned open carry and requires that concealed carry licensees carry their weapon fully hidden from view. Again, these are mostly definitions, not necessarily duties. Not in plain sight/not seen by ordinary observation: Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin Portion of gun or holster is exposed, is not concealed (partially visible): Arizona, Colorado, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma Portion of gun or holster is exposed, but the majority is hidden by clothing, is concealed (partially concealed): California, Georgia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Texas Totally/fully hidden from view: DC, Louisiana, South Carolina, South Dakota No state legitimately punishes accidental exposure. What is prohibited is intentional exposure of a firearm, or rephrased, concealment is required. Of course, there are one-offs like in Florida. Affirmative states (must be totally hidden from view, except accidental exposure): DC, South Carolina, Florida Implied total concealment states (anti-gun): California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York This article took 18 1/2 hours to research and write. It seems that no one else has taken the time to do the same work anywhere in the country. Help a guy out; buy a shirt!
In 2020, Nevada will have a large, angry, and motivated population of gun owners. The Nevada Firearms Coalition will have the largest group of members ever. More people will be awake and aware of the gun rights. By if we’re not careful, this will only because we’ve lost many valuable things. Since 1989, Nevada has made huge strides to becoming an A rated state for gun rights. Do we want to lose that in 2019? Individually, we all have to get involved. We have to write, email, call, and even visit our state legislators. Gun control must be fought every step of the way. A wise man once said “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.” Clicking the Like button on Facebook and posting memes won’t defend our rights. The Nevada Firearms Coalition Political Action Committee (PAC) has a great away to stay informed and involved. Join the Engage program by signing up for email alerts on pending legislation and when it’s time to email and phone blast your legislator. Follow the link and scroll down to the sign-up box. Personal connections with the legislators is important too. That’s why the PAC has a lobbyist to testify and talk with the senators and assemblymen. But a lobbyist has to get paid; since we have to work and live our lives, we can come together as a group and have someone do the legwork that we can’t. Media and outreach costs are important too. By making a donation or joining the Caliber Club, you can help pay the bills and continue the fight. The fight for gun rights is never ending. Preserving the Second Amendment isn’t filling up safes and waiting for a last stand, it’s being a part of your citizen government. Together we can keep the great accomplishments we’ve made and build a stronger base for the future. Sign up and donate today. This is the list of major, verifiable defensive gun uses in Nevada from 2018, mainly from major news sites. There were 24. The list is not complete. As a reminder, the overwhelming majority of defensive gun uses do not involve a shot being fired and are rarely reported to police. The most conservative reliable estimate is 100,000 DGUs occur each year in America, likely closer to half or one million. Recently, some really bad advice from some really bad concealed carry instructors has been making the rounds online here in Nevada. Specifically, these instructors are lying and saying that “printing” is illegal in Nevada. “Printing” is a term used describe when the outline of a concealed handgun is visible beneath tight or pinched clothing. The correct word is actually imprinting, because the imprint of the gun is visible in the folds of the shirt or jacket. Nevada has no law that can in anyway be reasonably construed to imply that “printing” is illegal. First, open carry is legal in Nevada. Whether the gun is carried openly on purpose or whether you happen to unintentionally expose it through movement or taking off a coat, etc., allowing others to see the gun is not a crime. Second, showing the outline of the firearm through your clothes is not criminal either, unless you happen to not have a permit. Nevada defines a “concealed firearm” as a loaded or unloaded handgun which is carried upon a person in such a manner as not to be discernible by ordinary observation (NRS 202.3653). Let’s not get too technical with this definition. Though one could argue that a very clear, obvious imprint of a handgun would be discernible as a firearm by ordinary observation, the long understanding is that the actual weapon is visible, not just its outline. No one should rush out to be a test case. Only deliberately exposing a holstered handgun to draw negative attention towards it as a threat is criminal (brandishing). Anyone who says that you can lose your permit in Nevada for “printing” or openly carrying is a liar. Many instructors use this as a fear-based tactic to generate business out of a concern that people will choose the free open carry option. Not so. People like the ability to conceal and also appreciate the training that comes from a classroom environment. In fact, most serious shooters and citizen carriers seek out quality training and continue their firearms education. Even police officers are mistaken or lie, usually the former. Officers often give “advice” or “warnings” to citizens printing or openly carrying. Officers have a very different reason to conceal their firearms and not look like a cop while off-duty or in plainclothes. The arguments against open carry and for very deep concealment do not apply to the average citizen carrier. Cops also have the observational skills and the necessity to look and see who might be armed. I would caution most that if they choose to conceal, do it well. It presents a better image of armed citizens if there aren’t photos of a dude in a tight t-shirt just covering over a 1911. But don't worry if you can spot the gun shape; most people can't. For bigger guys or those odd clothes, a vague shape under the shirt goes unnoticed if dressed well. Sloppy carry is something that criminals typically do, making a poorly concealed or poorly carried handgun a common identifier of crooks. You don’t want a gun in your waistband to give the guy at 7/11 a heart attack because he thinks you’re about to hold up the place. Certainly, in non-permissive environments like casinos one would also want to conceal well to avoid a ruckus or being asked to leave. Printing is essentially a non-issue in Nevada and other similar jurisdictions. No one really cares and no one really notices, unless you are constantly grabbing at your gun in public like Michael Jackson's affection for his crotch. Very few members of society who aren't law enforcement or well-trained are observant enough to notice a concealed firearm. Many people never even notice an openly carried one. Few people scan other people's bodies for guns deliberately, especially the general public who is uninterested in guns. If a criminal sees a concealed handgun, he will more than likely leave the person alone; criminals like targets that don't fight back (and gun snatchings, open or concealed, are very rare). Clothing tends to soften the traditional gun shape allowing the human mind, which likes to see what's familiar, interpret the folds as just the way the clothes are worn. If they see it's an object, a reasonable assumption would be a belt-clipped phone case or something similar. That assumes the person is interested enough to think about it further or that they are someone who cares enough to say or do something about a concealed carrier. Most of the horror stories of a soccer mom tackling a concealed carrier or panicking were accidental exposures or merely a lucky glimpse and inference. I don’t know how this pernicious rumor about printing started. In Texas, usually the source of bad carry law myths like California is the source of stupid laws, printing was never the issue people assumed it to be. You can read this excerpt from my forthcoming open carry book on Texas and the issue of printing there. To conclude, in Nevada, it’s not illegal if your gun prints. It will look tacky if it’s bad and might get you kicked out of an anti-gun business, but that’s all. Stay tuned while I research where printing is actually illegal. And buy a t-shirt, why don’t you? Private sales make some buyers and sellers nervous. Is this guy a felon? Is the gun stolen? Chances are, you never know. You also never know if down the line, the buyer or subsequent owner will use the gun in a crime. To some, a bill of sale appears to be the answer. Some buyers will refuse to fill out a bill of sale, for various reasons. It’s more complex than it seems. For the time being, private gun sales are legal in Nevada and in many other states. Voluntary private background check systems are rare. In the Silver State, one has to send a letter to Carson City using a courtesy program graciously extended by the Department of Public Safety after Question 1 stupidly eradicated the statutory provision for the same program. At least bureaucrats have more decency and sense than the gun banners. Yet the ambiguity raises concerns to some. Let’s dispel some myths. Selling to a felon or prohibited person unwittingly is not going to get anyone in trouble unless the seller knows the buyer can’t own guns. If someone is unsure, don’t do the sale. And if you do sell to a bad guy in good faith, the police still have to prove you knew or reasonably should have known that the neighbor you saw get arrested three times is a felon. The biggest fear sellers have is their gun turning up at a murder scene. The detectives call the ATF in West Virginia to trace what wholesaler bought the gun from the manufacture, what dealer bought it off the wholesaler, and who’s name is on the Form 4473 in the dealer’s files. Then the police call on the buyer, who, according to the myth, is taken downtown to be interrogated and charged with murder because it was “their gun.” A detective investigating what obviously appears to be a racial gang murder is not going to suspect the first buyer, John Smith, of the murder. The detective will be concerned that Mr. Smith sold the gun to a gang member, but more likely, the detective wants to know if Mr. Smith had the gun stolen or sold it. When the police call, Mr. Smith informs the detective that he sold the gun, and don’t you know, he sold it to Demarcus Williams. Mr. Smith was 300 miles from the scene of the murder. Adding in a layer, the officer contacts Demarcus Williams, who tells the detective he sold the gun because he was leaving for college and couldn’t have it there. Methy McRedneck was the buyer, who seemed a little intense. Turns out Methy McRedneck was owed $5,000 from the dead guy. Mr. Smith is off the hook. Having a bill of sale in the rare event it escapes confinement and kills someone illegally is handy for just one reason; so that if the police have the gun, they will get a lead on who might have bought the gun. Most citizens and gun owners secretly like to help solve crimes and be cool to the police, so they’ll happily give up their copy of a bill of sale to put a dirtbag behind bars. That’s all well and good, but those who actually had that happen are in the minority. Most of the time, the investigating detective pretty much assumes the original buyer had nothing to do with the crime for reasons above. Many gun owners refuse to do bills of sale because of concerns that their address and info may be used for theft later on or because of a simple invasion of their privacy rights. Someone who sells a car generally don’t keep any info on the buyer once their copy of the release of liability hits the mail and no one keeps tabs on who bought blunt objects or kitchen knives from their garage sale. Another reason is to avoid a paper trail that some do-good citizen might decide to hand over to the ATF if national gun registration ever becomes a thing. If the ATF traces buyers and threatens to those who claim they sold the gun to prove it, that bill of sale becomes a good way to keep your dog or your nursing wife from being shot. Unfortunately, many gun owners will gladly give up their guns and their paperwork to keep a future tyrannical government from stomping all over them. On one hand, I can’t fault people for doing whatever is necessary to save their family’s skins. On the other hand, I would hope they would tell the ATF to pound sand and be willing to go down in a hailstorm of lead should confiscation be attempted. This is assuming the ATF traced the gun to you in the first place, bothered to follow-up and harass people, and if they had the time/manpower to make arrests that the US attorney may or may not charge. It’s not likely that non-compliance with reasonable doubt will lead to you being drug off to the gulag. For those of you who keep bills of sale to dime out others to save your skin, I hope the ATF shoots your dog anyway. Finally, I don’t look to harshly upon people who want a bill of sale. For the most part, many are selling their first gun. For them, it’s peace of mind in a process they don’t fully grasp yet. Over time, as they come to realize most people buying and selling guns in their circle are also normal, the desire for needless paperwork will disappear. Make selling guns a non-issue and soon enough they’ll treat it like trading lawnmowers. Besides, half of these people will loose the paperwork anyway. It’s not something to harangue fans of Bill O’Sale over, just politely decline the sale. There is no reason to alienate private sellers when we can convince them their fears are empty. And sellers, if they have a CCW, you don’t need a bill of sale. If they do anything stupid with the gun you sold, there was nothing you could do about it. No need to be paranoid or feel guilty. ![]() There has been a steady parade of backlash from NRA board members and other prominent NRA figures against the burning criticism of the self-billed “oldest civil rights organization.” I am sick of decrepit old people, rich people, and famous people telling me I’m wrong for airing legitimate criticism. I don’t want to fall in line and shut-up because a wrinkled old crone told me to. In the wake of supporting President Trump’s bump-fire stock ban, outcry against the association for its support of a ban has been vociferous. They did this because in the wake of the October 1 Route 91 shooting, where the killer used bump-fire stocks as ersatz machine guns from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay, it seemed that ownership of these stocks was indefensible. Plenty of gun owners on both sides of the current NRA debate have expressed disinterest or outright loathing of bump-fire stocks. Yet plenty of those who call the sliding plastic stocks “stupid crap” opposed any such ban, especially a regulatory one, because of the slippery slope. Such a redefinition of rate of fire, getting away from the strict definition of a machine gun as multiple shots from one distinct pull of the trigger, could be used to back bans of binary trigger packs, triggers with lighter pulls, or even semi-automatic weapons entirely. Backing up to 2017, when it seemed like Congress might pass a ban itself (an unquestionably legal ban, if not constitutional), many defended the NRA and President Trump’s call for an administrative change to ATF regulations as “3D chess” or some such strategy to prevent legislation from passing. But after the threat of legislation died off, we were left with a looming regulatory ban and no advancement of any pro-gun legislation. Indeed, movement on deregulating suppressors and national reciprocity stopped, leaving them as good as dead with the Democrat-led House in the 115th Congress. Frustration mounted that with a Republican majority in the House and Senate, neither measure went up for a vote, but now a very dangerous precedent might be set. Political irritation with the GOP is another matter, but among the grievances of NRA members was that the organization had not put much visible effort into getting the pro-gun bills passed. Lack of success and appeasement of an enemy that can never be appeased did not make many NRA members happy. No headway being made and the loss of something, even as seemingly inconsequential as a bump-fire stock, was the last straw for these members. Much of the criticism of the NRA was that it was “all noise, no action.” Bloggers and YouTube stars have complained that the NRA is a club for it’s elite members and to provide political cover for members of Congress. In essence, the NRA’s federal lobby was a scam. Gun owners’ interests were not at the heart. With board elections coming up, pieces are appearing all over the Internet from board members and other NRA honchos begging members not to throw out the board and belittling those who want radical action. Marion Hammer is one such member who seems to be contemptuous of those in the gun right’s movement who truly believe that “shall not be infringed” means what it says. She and a few others are downright contemptuous of what has become the new face of gun right activism. We are not a polite, ever suffering majority any longer. The NRA has failed to change with the times. With the very long tenure of Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox, the organization has become part of the DC swamp where connections and money is valued more than winning. I’ll not delve into the specifics here, but the milquetoast corporate leadership seems more interest in preserving its semblance of power and privilege than actually winning successes. We do not want compromisers in office who take heavy paychecks to squander a once-in-a-lifetime trifecta at the federal level, only to go weak at the knees and give something up. This was the organization that dared suggest guns in schools was the answer to mass shootings in 2013 and took it on the nose. Coming to my conclusion, it’s not the NRA that’s the problem. Instead, it’s the very top of corporate leadership that is the problem. The board of directors need to be cleaned out and given the power to throw out executives like LaPierre again. LaPierre and Cox need to go and take their PR and ad firms along with them, while their sycophants pack up their offices as well. The NRA needs radicals at the top who realize we are fighting—literally—to keep our right to bear arms on the cusp of a civil war. With fresh blood at the top, the whole body will prosper and can wield its tremendous power to influence Congress and the President.
Reading the defenses of the NRA make me sick because it sounds like an abusive husband telling his broken and bloody wife “If you leave me, no one else will love you or take care of you.” Even moderate defenses, of the organization as a whole and not the cancerous leadership, fail to separate the tumor from the body. The training, media, outreach, safety, and historical aspects of the NRA are as great as they have ever been. The NRA, aside from its middling actions in Washington, is a strong entity worthy of support. At the state level, the NRA-ILA does do as much as it reasonably can. In Nevada, we’ve recently received help from them and back in 2016, their help with Question 1 was invaluable. Through the work of Kevin Kam and others, they helped us turn what we thought was going to be a defeat by 20% to a difference of less than one percent (thanks Clark County). The NRA is still the first-stop for those gun owners who are newly politically active. My friend’s parents, live-long Californians, recently bought a shotgun and joined the NRA. They are enthusiastic members and supporters of firearms freedom. Should we put them down for signing up? Of course not. They’ve already seen the value in donating to California state groups and other organizations like GOA and SAF. State and these alternative organizations are perfect places to still support the political cause for NRA-protesters like myself. For many of us, including myself, we cannot donate to the NRA until they clean-up their act. It is not our goal to kill the NRA, but to reform it. We want it to reflect what the changed face of gun rights activism is; a true fight for survival. Until the NRA feels the pinch of declining membership and lost revenue, it will not listen to what gun owners want. We don’t need to throw the baby out with the bath water, but that doesn’t mean that we as gun owners and members (current, former, and future) should continue to accept compromise. We do not want Wayne and Chris negotiating our rights away. We want our juggernaut to begin throwing its weight around. Imagine if Fairfax called for one million AR-15 armed people to converge on the National Mall and bussed them all in from Virginia? Bloomberg and Soros would do it. A father disciplines his children out of love in order to correct their misbehavior. That’s all that we protesters and unhappy members are calling for; positive change. Once the NRA realizes that it cannot continue to be the political organization it has been and institutes positive, lasting changes, we can once again wholeheartedly embrace it. ![]() Just a few short weeks ago, 2019 began, ushering in the fight of our lives in Nevada. It’s going to be a tough year for gun rights, but with your help, we can stem the tide of anti-gun bills steamrolling towards us. Priority One of the Nevada Firearms Coalition’s Political Action Committee is to support the gains we have made since 2011, including enhanced preemption which eliminated handgun registration “blue cards” in Clark County. Yet there is no reason to despair. You can help fight the onslaught and stop anti-gun fantasies from becoming reality. To fight, it takes money. The PAC employs a dedicated lobbyist in Carson City to reach out to the legislators. Your money can also go to the NVFAC Foundation, which helps train and educate shooters through its youth and Annie Oakley women’s program. The Foundation supports matches like IDPA and the Know Your Limits .22 match. Thousands of new women shooters have been introduced by way of the Annie Oakley program. And for just $25 a month, you can’t beat the free range days for members on the private, Education Center range at the Clark County Shooting Complex. If you’re not a member, please join the Nevada Firearms Coalition today. Get great member benefits from local stores, restaurants, and instructors include discounts on things like barbecue, ammunition purchases, and training. To make an additional donation, or for current members to help keep up the fight, please donate to the NVFAC PAC. Our anti-gun foes are beating down the door and your donations are immediately needed to help secure what’ve gained. One time-donations can be made here, and if you’d like to make a monthly recurring donation, why not join the Caliber Club and do it denominated in the amount of your favorite caliber? The benefit of joining the Caliber Club is that the PAC knows exactly how much money it can count on each month. The Nevada Firearms Coalition Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit charity with the objective of promoting the shooting sports, conservation, firearm safety and shooting education in Nevada. You can donate directly to them here, or sign up for the Amazon Smile program. AmazonSmile is just Amazon.com, but the AmazonSmile Foundation will donate .5% of the purchase price of eligible products to the charitable organization of your choice. Please note that you must use smile.amazon.com website and select the NVFAC Foundation to shop to have your purchases count towards the donation. If you use their regular website there will be no donation made. Smith’s grocery shoppers can also have up to .5% of their eligible purchases donated to the Foundation. Visit Smith’s Inspire webpage and sign up. Sign into your account or create an account. Then link your Rewards Card to the NVFAC Foundation or the organization number LY109. Select and save your choice. Nevada Carry/Frontier Carry are not affiliated with the Firearms Coalition or the NRA. If you wish to support Nevada Carry, buy a t-shirt today! And wear it to the legislative hearings.
Whoring t-shirt designs again. Click the image to buy the shirt design you like and help support the blog. Frontier Carry Teespring StorefrontPerfect to wear to legislative hearings on gun control! I suggest everyone wear black because black scares them and it creates a uniform look. If you want to be stylish. Including the ever-popular "Deplorables' Snowflake Removal Service" series. A shooting occurred at the Green Valley Ranch casino Tuesday afternoon. One person was shot by hotel security. There were no other injuries/fatalities. A bystander reported that security fired six times at the suspect who was reportedly in the ballroom or lobby area. Others reported that police told them the man was seen by security entering the building with a gun. Shannon Michael Howell, 53, of Las Vegas was the deceased. Howell apparently came to the casino to commit suicide as he had both a suicide note on his person and a pistol with one round chambered, but an empty magazine. Howell was contacted by three securities guards, apparently already having the gun in his hand, according to some accounts. This appears to be suicide-by-cop (security guard). It was initially reported as an active shooter, but authorities said it is not terrorism related and was an isolated incident. Hospitals were alerted to potential mass casualty incident, but as only the suspect was shot, the alert was canceled. Guests and staff were evacuated, but some guests complained they were not told what was going on or what to do. While it is legal to carry a firearm in a casino, persons who are asked to leave or disarm may be trespassed. Nearly every casino in Nevada including the Station Casino (Green Valley Ranch) properties prohibit guests from possessing firearms. Casino properties are generally considered non-permissive carry zones or gun free zones for this reason. This is the first known defensive gun use in Nevada in 2019. |
Archives
December 2024
CategoriesBlog roll
Clayton E. Cramer Gun Watch Gun Free Zone The War on Guns Commander Zero The View From Out West |